We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Warning: JavaScript is required for some functionalities of this page. Please enable the use of JavaScript in your browser. Log In
Register My Account
Log Out (%1$s)

We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.

Warning: JavaScript is required for some functionalities of this page. Please enable the use of JavaScript in your browser.

Yeah, Tolkien really did create Sauron as an evil entity from the start of his writings. Why? His story needed a villain. And Sauron is the villain. He doesn't come across as sympathetic in any of the published material. And then in the later publishing of his notes and letters, he still isn't a very strong sympathetic villain.

In the Silmarillion Mairon exists. It fully covers his love of all things ordered, it also covers his abandonment of the Valar to follow Melkor who Sauron believed was good at "getting things done". Tolkien didn't write the Sil as some afterthought once he'd finished the LotR. Middle Earth and it's histories were all very well formulated in his head long before the LotR was published. I think he tried to publish the Sil first, but his publishers told him no one would care about it? Anyway, Sauron's original motives and subsequent fall from grace were not add ons, they were part of his character from the get go. Just because they're not fully outlined in the LotR doesn't mean they don't exist.

Originally Posted by Snoggy

Magneto is a great example of a sympathetic villain. He has very emotional very powerful reasons for taking villainous action. Reasons people can empathize with. Sauron, not so much.

Sauron has very deep seated, powerful reasons for taking his actions too. Perhaps you can't empathise with his reasons but that doesn't mean none of us can.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

I need to get all twelve volumes of HOME, I just have the one :-/ a great and enlightening read. I've always criticized Tolkien of having a few stiff characters here and there, but maybe my critism was ill-founded?

Any reference within A Book of Lost Tales Part One? So I can go over it and add to this conversation.

At the beginning Sauron is Mairon, an Ainu who followed his God's music, not like some others. So he was an evil entity already then? o.O

So when Tolkien sat down to write a story and thought to himself "I need a villain for this tale," he immediately decided to skip over Sauron because he was far too good a character, too noble and way too likable to utilize in such a simplistic way as making him the dark lord of middle earth who the entirety of the free peoples band together to challenge?

I think you've really taken this about as far as it can go. You're trying to convince folks that the villain isn't a villain. It might not be as black and white as something very simplistic like the story of Hansel and Gretel, but Sauron's not even close to being a sympathetic villain. Nor has Tolkien ever suggested as much.

Sauron has very deep seated, powerful reasons for taking his actions too. Perhaps you can't empathise with his reasons but that doesn't mean none of us can.

Here's the thing.

Magneto became a villain because:

1- His family fled to Poland and lived in a ghetto during the nazi regime.
2- His family was executed and put into a mass grave.
3- He survived, but felt the full force of nazi anti-semitism.
4- He also faced a world of hatred for being a mutant.

So he decides the best course of action to counter the deep seeded racism he's encountered in humanity is to create a brotherhood of mutants who are superior to normal humans and who will take action by any means necessary to prevent further discrimination and hatred and genocide.

Compared to that, Sauron's motivations are what again?

And I'm just picking a comic book villain. One that may not be as flimsy as say The Prankster or Braniac, but still, a comic book villain.

I'm not at all convinced Sauron is some complex crafted personality full of noble motives and tragic outcomes making him a fallen angel of misunderstood virtue and sympathy.

He's really just a dark and evil tyrant that serves the purpose of being the villain in a story that hinges on heroes versus villains.

Just last night, I watched The Dark Knight Rises. After seeing Bane and his actions, I was reminded of this thread, and I see a common link between Sauron and Bane.

Bane decided he knew better than everyone else, and claimed he was just doing what was best. So according to him, that means cutting a city off from the world, imprisoning its people, letting criminals run loose in the streets, sealing the police in an underground subway complex, and destroying the entire city in a nuclear blast.

It doesn't matter what his intentions were. He was evil.

No one in their right mind decides that enslaving/killing off entire populations will do any good. They are the very thing they claim to hate so much. Good intentions are worth nothing if you use evil means to acquire them -- the ends do NOT justify the means. And isn't that what evil is -- good corrupted? While no one can be fully evil (you must always have motives for any action), you are ultimately responsible for the evil you do. After all, you decided to do it -- knowingly and willingly. It's not like Morgoth took a gun to Sauron's head and forced him to join his side. Morgoth told Sauron what he wanted to hear. And even when Sauron learned that Morgoth was a vile, corrupted being, he still followed him.

If Sauron was such a goody-goody, why didn't he leave Morgoth's side when he saw him steal, destroy and kill?

I'm not at all convinced Sauron is some complex crafted personality full of noble motives and tragic outcomes making him a fallen angel of misunderstood virtue and sympathy.

Oh I agree, he isn't very complex, but he is certainly a fallen angel, as Tolkien stated. He sees the greater benefit for all, but being of an immortal nature with a pretty screwed up moral system, he doesn't care for the individual suffereing of the petty little mortals. He just sees their "temporary" (from his point of view temporary at least) suffering as collateral damage, a sacrific that has to be made, and he doesn't seem to care about them.

He's really just a dark and evil tyrant that serves the purpose of being the villain in a story that hinges on heroes versus villains.

Exactly. By the time of LotR, Sauron had become an evil tyrant to act as the villain. And that is what he is; a villain.
Pure evil? No. A bad guy? Certainly.

If Sauron was such a goody-goody, why didn't he leave Morgoth's side when he saw him steal, destroy and kill?

And there we have it.
That is the big question, isn't it?
I can see a number of reasons, but none which stand out as the most likely.
Why did he not leave Morgoth when he saw what his master was doing?
Was Melkor's moving from good to evil so slowly that Sauron didn't notice until he was too far gone? Probably not, Melkor does not strike as the type to take things slowly, he was rather direct about things.
What seems more likely is that because of his immortal nature, Sauron just lost touch with the, to him insignifanct and brief, lives of mortals and thought of their suffering as simply something that needed to be done in order to get the world to where he wanted to be. Or maybe he didn't lose touch with it, maybe he never understood the whole mortality thing in the first place; perhaps in his twisted views he reckoned that since the dead just go to the Halls of Mandos and get an afterlife, why not kill those who would go against his plans? After all, they are still in existence, just not in Arda. No harm done, so to speak.
And yet the most cruelly ironic part of this is of course that while he thinks he is doing the inhabitants Middle-earth a favour by "weeding out" the ones who are against his grand vision of a unified world, his wars are in fact causing great suffering to the aforementioned inhabitants.
But again, that is where the original question comes up, although put differently put. How did it come so far that Sauron no longer recognises good deeds from evil deeds? (this time not in Melkor, but in himself)
And the answer to that is anyone's guess. In my personal view, I reckon he thinks only in long term views because of his immortal state. He wants a unified Middle-earth so that everyone grows in the same direction, so he goes for the easiest and quickest solution: Conquer all races so they'd have to obey him. He doesn't seem to care that he needs to wage war and kill thousands to do that, because I think in his eyes the present is of little importance and only that future matters. He probably even thinks that if he conquers all, the next generations will surely praise him for doing the "necessary deeds" to get that unified Arda. The guy had some severe morality issues to work out, but I believe they all stem forth from that single problem of just not understanding that the individual matters too, even if their lives are but a passing moment to him. Not just the big picture matters.

But this brings forth an interesting new question.
Why were Sauron, Melkor, Ungoliant, the Belryg, and all others Ainur that began commiting evil deeds, why did they have have such a strange and to us immoral way of doing things, when the other Ainur were mostly doing good things? What was the difference between them?
Since they were all thoughts of Eru given form, I can't help but think that Eru is also above this whole mortal morality business and has thoughts about the world that we can't even begin to understand. After all, Eru too killed off an entire civilisation when they did not obey a command.
Moral to us? Certainly not. Moral by Sauron's standard? Probably.
Eru too (and perhaps all Ainur as well) seems to have no issues with killing thousands if it means a general betterment for the rest of the world. Perhaps all of them have this immortal notion of a long-term betterment even if it means a temporary suffering for the little mortals, but it is more strongly evident in some than others.

Last edited by BirdofHermes; Aug 22 2012 at 11:49 AM.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

Oh I agree, he isn't very complex, but he is certainly a fallen angel, as Tolkien stated. He sees the greater benefit for all, but being of an immortal nature with a pretty screwed up moral system, he doesn't care for the individual suffereing of the petty little mortals. He just sees their "temporary" (from his point of view temporary at least) suffering as collateral damage, a sacrific that has to be made, and he doesn't seem to care about them.

Correcting a "minor" misperception again, Sauron is not a fallen angel (analogy), the fallen angel is Morgoth, Sauron Equivalent would be a lesser angelic entity.

Exactly. By the time of LotR, Sauron had become an evil tyrant to act as the villain. And that is what he is; a villain.
Pure evil? No. A bad guy? Certainly.

By the time of LoTR, Sauron amassed such power he corrupted other "lesser angelic entities" like Saruman, he controlled the weather, his power grew only dimished by not having the one ring, a Villan? yes. closest thing to complete evil in middle-earth mythos? Yes.

But this brings forth an interesting new question.
Why were Sauron, Melkor, Ungoliant, the Belryg, and all others Ainur that began commiting evil deeds, why did they have have such a strange and to us immoral way of doing things, when the other Ainur were mostly doing good things? What was the difference between them?
Since they were all thoughts of Eru given form, I can't help but think that Eru is also above this whole mortal morality business and has thoughts about the world that we can't even begin to understand. After all, Eru too killed off an entire civilisation when they did not obey a command.
Moral to us? Certainly not. Moral by Sauron's standard? Probably.
Eru too (and perhaps all Ainur as well) seems to have no issues with killing thousands if it means a general betterment for the rest of the world. Perhaps all of them have this immortal notion of a long-term betterment even if it means a temporary suffering for the little mortals, but it is more strongly evident in some than others.

Morally common good is part of the story if not most LOTR, ERU created the Valar and the lesser ainur, he created elves, men and dwarves, and no Eru was morally right by sinking Numenor as it became wicked people about to do what other wicked,twisted beigns do "destroy or bend good people".

Btw Manwe the Valar had direct contact with Eru, so the assault to capture Melkor, was really morally right as its a way to proctect the chieldren of Eru.

Now Sauron morality is questionable to the core, he wanted Numenor to fall so his motives are clear either way, Numenor the Highest realm of man-kind (good people before been twisted by evil Sauron).

Sauron is not someone that wants to unify and diminish the suffering of free peoples, just like Melkor they twist everythig they can, Melkor created Orcs, Sauron created the Nazgul...Sauron is a force of evil and the greatest force of evil by Third age.

Sauron is the same as in the first age but possibly has learned from his mistakes and now is even darker, hence Dark lord:

"Sauron [...] was only less evil than his master in that for long he served another and not himself."
― J.R.R. Tolkien

Correcting a "minor" misperception again, Sauron is not a fallen angel (analogy), the fallen angel is Morgoth, Sauron Equivalent would be a lesser angelic entity.

By the time of LoTR, Sauron amassed such power he corrupted other "lesser angelic entities" like Saruman, he controlled the weather, his power grew only dimished by not having the one ring, a Villan? yes. closest thing to complete evil in middle-earth mythos? Yes.

Morally common good is part of the story if not most LOTR, ERU created the Valar and the lesser ainur, he created elves, men and dwarves, and no Eru was morally right by sinking Numenor as it became wicked people about to do what other wicked,twisted beigns do "destroy or bend good people".

Btw Manwe the Valar had direct contact with Eru, so the assault to capture Melkor, was really morally right as its a way to proctect the chieldren of Eru.

Now Sauron morality is questionable to the core, he wanted Numenor to fall so his motives are clear either way, Numenor the Highest realm of man-kind (good people before been twisted by evil Sauron).

Sauron is not someone that wants to unify and diminish the suffering of free peoples, just like Melkor they twist everythig they can, Melkor created Orcs, Sauron created the Nazgul...Sauron is a force of evil and the greatest force of evil by Third age.

Sauron is the same as in the first age but possibly has learned from his mistakes and now is even darker, hence Dark lord:

We've been over this discussion. You did not provide anything to back up your claims and instead resorted to simply calling my sources false. I am not falling into your trap again. Go troll somewhere else.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

No one in their right mind decides that enslaving/killing off entire populations will do any good.

But Sauron was not in his right mind, he had clearly descended into obsession and madness. Plus, he never intended to kill off any entire population, enslaving, yes.

Originally Posted by myfreezr2

They are the very thing they claim to hate so much. Good intentions are worth nothing if you use evil means to acquire them -- the ends do NOT justify the means. And isn't that what evil is -- good corrupted? While no one can be fully evil (you must always have motives for any action), you are ultimately responsible for the evil you do. After all, you decided to do it -- knowingly and willingly. It's not like Morgoth took a gun to Sauron's head and forced him to join his side. Morgoth told Sauron what he wanted to hear. And even when Sauron learned that Morgoth was a vile, corrupted being, he still followed him.

If Sauron was such a goody-goody, why didn't he leave Morgoth's side when he saw him steal, destroy and kill?

Sauron didn't think in terms of "good and evil" though, he seemed to think in a completely detached way. Numbers and efficiency (etc) instead of right and wrong in the usual sense. Sauron was attracted to Morgoth's ability to make things happen and bring his ideas to fruition. To Sauron that ability was a good one. The thing he hated was wasted time and energy, I don't think he ever became that. In his view he was constantly fighting against those who were either ignorant or apathetic where sensibility and efficiency were concerned.

Melkor's motives were simply to corrupt and destroy. I'd say that makes Melkor pretty much fully evil. His motives, ends and means were evil. In Sauron's case his means certainly were evil, but the other two are up for debate (as we've seen).

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

By the time of LoTR, Sauron amassed such power he corrupted other "lesser angelic entities" like Saruman, he controlled the weather, his power grew only dimished by not having the one ring, a Villan? yes. closest thing to complete evil in middle-earth mythos? Yes.

You have the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8. Of those numbers, 8 is the closest thing to 12 in the list.

Does that make 8 = 12?

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

We've been over this discussion. You did not provide anything to back up your claims and instead resorted to simply calling my sources false. I am not falling into your trap again. Go troll somewhere else.

Did you see the ast quote of my post, its J.R.R tokien, I backed up everything I said, your lack of logic is disturbing, please accept defeat a go cry on your corner.

Did you see the ast quote of my post, its J.R.R tokien, I backed up everything I said, your lack of logic is disturbing, please accept defeat a go cry on your corner.

Unfortunately, that last quote you posted does not back you up, if anything it goes against what you've been trying to say that there is absolute evil in Sauron. I'm guessing the language barrier is your main problem, you do not have the ability to understand what is written in front of you. All you do is go "lalalala I'm right and everyone else is wrong". You blatantly go against what Tolkien has written, and when you are driven a corner with his quotes, you simply take a pathetic way out and say they are falsified. And now that that doesn't work anymor,e you resort to insults. Nice.
And the worst thing about it, you do not even seem to understand that you're doing it. Not to mention you cannot even a simple logical conclusion that good does not become evil without a reason.

Debating you is like playing chess with a pigeon. It'll never understand and probably thinks it has won when it knocks over the pieces. I've tried to get a simple point across for 2 pages now, and I had to give up, by either your inability to graps the language or by sheer stupidity.

And it's IN a corner, not ON a corner. Blast it all.

Last edited by BirdofHermes; Aug 23 2012 at 10:02 AM.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

Unfortunately, that last quote you posted does not back you up, if anything it goes against what you've been trying to say that there is absolute evil in Sauron. I'm guessing the language barrier is your main problem, you do not have the ability to understand what is written in front of you. All you do is go "lalalala I'm right and everyone else is wrong". You blatantly go against what Tolkien has written, and when you are driven a corner with his quotes, you simply take a pathetic way out and say they are falsified. And now that that doesn't work anymor,e you resort to insults. Nice.
And the worst thing about it, you do not even seem to understand that you're doing it. Not to mention you cannot even a simple logical conclusion that good does not become evil without a reason.

Debating you is like playing chess with a pigeon. It'll never understand and probably thinks it has won when it knocks over the pieces. I've tried to get a simple point across for 2 pages now, and I had to give up, by either your inability to graps the language or by sheer stupidity.

And it's IN a corner, not ON a corner. Blast it all.

Im the one with insults...lol, you fail to see yourself don't you? just like you are wrong about sauron

I maybe wrong in semantics, but you are completely off in content, context and logic.

Lets get back on track on this thread, you are derailing it again...lol and you call me a troll.

"Sauron [...] was only less evil than his master in that for long he served another and not himself."
― J.R.R. Tolkien

This is the quote I used by Tolkien, do understand what it means?
Explanation: its means Sauron became more evil without a master, no leash no retraint his master was Melkor.

This is the quote I used by Tolkien, do understand what it means?
Explanation: its means Sauron became more evil without a master, no leash no retraint his master was Melkor.

Do you grasp it?

Ofc I do. But that does not mean he was, as you have been claiming, wholly evil. You don't seem to grasp that simple fact: doing a degree of evil does not automatically make one wholly evil.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

Ofc I do. But that does not mean he was, as you have been claiming, wholly evil. You don't seem to grasp that simple fact: doing a degree of evil does not automatically make one wholly evil.

Yes I may have claimed at some point Sauron was evil or purely evil, obviously I'm wrong on that point, but you and Curand are wrong in claiming Sauron end-goal is just and noble, his order a virtue and so on...

Sauron was evil, not wholly but pretty evil in fact more evil than Melkor that is "analogy" of Satan...

You guys are also wrong in claiming Sauron only want to "envision a better world" I proved time after time that point, Sauron didn't want "common good" in any way.

So there you have it, I was wrong on 1 point you guys were wrong in how many? it doesn't matter...accept it.

Yes I may have claimed at some point Sauron was evil or purely evil, obviously I'm wrong on that point, but you and Curand are wrong in claiming Sauron end-goal is just and noble, his order a virtue and so on...

Sauron was evil, not wholly but pretty evil in fact more evil than Melkor that is "analogy" of Satan...

You guys are also wrong in claiming Sauron only want to "envision a better world" I proved time after time that point, Sauron didn't want "common good" in any way.

So there you have it, I was wrong on 1 point you guys were wrong in how many? it doesn't matter...accept it.

Unfortunately for you, no.
Sauron did want to improve the world when he joined Melkor, as Tolkien wrote. He loved order and wanted to get rid of all the time-wasting nonsense and chaos that was happening. By the time of WoTR ofc, most of that goal had been forgotten, but all of his evil actions did stem forth from that initial goal.

Does it make him good? Certainly not.
But it gives him the reason to be evil. Without that vision, without that goal, he would not have been turned to evil.

Last edited by BirdofHermes; Aug 23 2012 at 12:55 PM.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

Unfortunately for you, no.
Sauron did want to improve the world when he joined Melkor, as Tolkien wrote. He loved order and wanted to get rid of all the time-wasting nonsense and chaos that was happening. By the time of WoTR ofc, most of that goal had been forgotten, but all of his evil actions did stem forth from that initial goal.

Does it make him good? Certainly not.
But it gives him the reason to be evil. Without that vision, without that goal, he would not have been turned to evil.

Ok lets backed up a bit.

Can please put the source were tolkien states "Sauron wanted to get rid of all the time wasting friction and chaos", you claim this is somehow his motive and goal itself, you claim it wasn't melkor who turned sauron evil but was "the chaos" he saw.

Ok now its time you back it up, with a credible source.

Ill post my source were it says its basically melkor that made Sauron follow him.

Can please put the source were tolkien states "Sauron wanted to get rid of all the time wasting friction and chaos", you claim this is somehow his motive and goal itself, you claim it wasn't melkor who turned sauron evil but was "the chaos" he saw.

Oh no, you misunderstand; Melkor definitely turned him evil, but it was only possible because of Sauron's vision.
Think this; If Sauron had been perfectly happy with the way Arda was, surely he would never have joined Morgoth's side and instead would have stood against him together with the other Maiar and Valar.

- Sauron loved order and thought Arda was far too chaotic.
(probably because it was still imperfect due to Melkor's marring of it, but that is my own speculation and never stated by Tolkien)
- Sauron probably wanted to improve things from the very start, but he did not have the guts to go against the wishes of the other Maiar and Valar, nor did he have the power to do it. But then this Melkor fellow came along.
- Sauron admired Melkor's power and his ability to just "do" things. (which is a dangerous sign Sauron apparently missed, or maybe he ignored it due to him thinking the benefits outweighed the the negatives)
- Sauron and several others joined him, believing Melkor had the power to make their ideas come true. Or possibly Melkor whispered that sort of thoughts into their ears first. Either way, they ended up joining Melkor though either own free will or through Melkor's deception.

Ok now its time you back it up, with a credible source.

“Sauron had never reached this stage of nihilistic madness [as Morgoth had]. He did not object to the existence of the world, so long as he could do what he liked with it. He still had the relics of positive purposes, that descended from the good of the nature in which he began: it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall, and of his relapse) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction."—J.R.R. Tolkien, The History of Middle-earth X: Morgoth’s Ring

"He [Sauron] had gone the way of all tyrants: beginning well, at least on the level that while desiring to order all things according to his own wisdom he still at first considered the (economic) well-being of other inhabitants of the Earth. But he went further than human tyrants in pride and the lust for domination, being in origin an immortal (angelic) spirit."—J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter 183

That last sentence I often refer to in my reply to myfreezr2. Being immortal, he lost a great deal of his inhibitions, empathy and perhaps even simple understanding in regard to us mortal beings, and just went further than the mortal tyrants we still see today.

Now in some of your posts you claimed Sauron just wanted power, in others you claimed he wanted to kill and/or humiliate the children of Illuvatar.
Humiliating I can somewhat understand, since he had grown to hate some of the Free Peoples, like Elves and Dwarves for their past quarrels with him. A revenge of sorts.
However, gaining power or killing them would be meaningless. It wouldn't do him any good. Power in itself is a useless thing, you need something to do with that power. You could have all the power in the world, but it's useless if there's nothing around to use it for or to use it on.
For instance, if you had enough power to, say, control other people's minds, but you're left stranded on a post-apocaliptic earth with no life left, what good is that power to you?
Power is never the goal for such villains, it is control. Power alone is meaningless if you can't exert it in some way; the ability to exert that power to control aspects of the world around you, now that is really interesting.

In Sauron's case, killing the children of Illuvatar would be disastrous for him. He can no longer travel to the Undying Lands, let alone face the Valar even if he could, so the only thing he had left was Middle-earth. If he killed the inhabitants, he'd have nothing left to do except being bored until the end of time. Maybe torture some ants with a magnifying glass.
But ruling them, now that is something he could do. And that is exactly what he used his power for, as even you should be able to see throughout the history of Middle-earth. He ruled those he could easily persuade or dominate, such as Orcs/Trolls that were originally Melkor's, and Men in the East and South which were easily swayed due to still living under the shadow left by Melkor.
Elves, Dwarves and the other Men he tried to rule over with wars first, then later with his ingenious plan of the Rings. Which only half-worked since Elves quickly cast them off and Dwarves seemed immune to be bent to his will via the Rings. But the Men he managed to control. So to complete his conquest of Middle-earth, he simply started warring again to conquer what was left by force, and those who did not surrender after seeing their realms fall, he would simply eliminate so that all that was left would be an obeying people.
So in short, killing them is not the answer as to why he did his evil deeds either.

Which only leaves the last option which I mentioned before: he wanted control. He wanted to rule them. He wanted to dictate what they could and could not do, which is evident even before the WoTR when he attempted to control them with the Rings.
But it does not end there.
Right now you should be asking yourself; "Why did he want to rule them?"
In other words, what good was control to him?
After all, it's not as if he needed anything from them. He did not require peasents working for him since he did not eat nor drink. He did not require grand castles to live in if he didn't want to; he was immortal after all, so he could sleep in a desert during noon if he felt like it.
So while I agree that humiliating them is somewhat of a valid reason to do it, as an act of revenge, it cannot be the reason he bagan his evil with. Because when he started, he didn't hate any of the people in Middle-earth, and they had never wronged him. He nad no reason for revenge, nor did he even show any sign he disliked them besides being a bit too chaotic. After all, he was still the Good Little Maia when he first joined Melkor so long ago.
So what was the main reason for doing it, if not initially humiliation?
And then we come to the only logical conclusion, to which that first Tolkien quote refers;

He wanted to rule them to steer them in what was, in his own mind, the right direction for Middle-earth. After all, if all the sentient inhabitants of Middle-earth were guided in the same direction (by force if needed), everything would be a lot smoother and there'd be less chaos, and the world could advance.

[I]In the sea without lees standeth the Bird of Hermes.
[/I][I]When all his feathers be from him gone, He standeth still here as a stone.
Here is now both white and red, And all so the stone to quicken the dead[/I][I].
The Bird of Hermes is my name, Eating my wings to make me tame.[/I]

Can please put the source were tolkien states "Sauron wanted to get rid of all the time wasting friction and chaos", you claim this is somehow his motive and goal itself, you claim it wasn't melkor who turned sauron evil but was "the chaos" he saw.

Ok now its time you back it up, with a credible source.

Ill post my source were it says its basically melkor that made Sauron follow him.

One last time for good measure...

"Nothing is evil in the beginning. Even Sauron was not so."

- Elrond

"it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall ...) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction." Thus "it was the apparent will and power of Melkor to effect his designs quickly and masterfully that had first attracted Sauron to him."

- Morgoth's Ring

"Bereft of his lord...[he] fell into the folly of imitating him." "Very slowly, beginning with fair motives: the reorganizing and rehabilitation of Middle-earth, 'neglected by the gods,' he becomes a reincarnation of Evil, and a thing lusting for Complete Power"

- Morgoth's Ring

(NOTE: becomes an incarnation of Evil (due to Morgoth's corruption). Note further his fair motives...)

"[Sauron] was not indeed wholly evil, not unless all 'reformers' who want to hurry up with 'reconstruction' and 'reorganization' are wholly evil, even before pride and the lust to exert their will eat them up".

- Morgoth's Ring

"[T]hough the only real good in, or rational motive for, all this ordering and planning and organization was the good of all inhabitants of Arda (even admitting Sauron's right to be their supreme lord), his 'plans', the idea coming from his own isolated mind, became the sole object of his will, and an end, the End, in itself. ... [H]is capability of corrupting other minds, and even engaging their service, was a residue from the fact that his original desire for 'order' had really envisaged the good estate (especially physical well-being) of his 'subjects'."

- Morgoth's Ring

So, as we've been saying all thread..

His motives and intentions were not evil ones, Tolkien agrees, thankfully.

As an aside, if you're so fixated on finding characters with no obersvable good intentions (per se) how about any of the myriad "leaders" who joined Sauron? How about the Nazgul, who took the rings, and fell to their spell, through lust for power and greed? Or Saruman who out of jealousy and fear sided with Sauron, believing that Sauron would win and grant Saruman considerable influence and power? Most characters who joined Sauron's banner did so out of promises of power, wealth or safety. Those are far less redeemable aims when compared with Sauron's misguided intent. Saruman, particularly, who was well placed to aid the free peoples against Sauron abandoned all his "allies" and sided with the Enemy. Say what you will about Sauron's great power over minds and corrupting influence, the seed has to be there for him to work his "magic". He couldn't bend Aragorn to his will, he struggled greatly to draw any Dwarves under any semblance of sway, yet Saruman jumped ship and joined him with comparitive eagerness.

There are plenty of people who oppose the free peoples without any such "grand motive" like Sauron has. Craving power or personal comfort are hardly fair motives. Of all the people who fell from positions of honour and grace, you're targeting one of the most well considered, in terms of original motives, among them as the candidate for "pure evil".

Last edited by Curandhras; Aug 23 2012 at 07:14 PM.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

"Bereft of his lord...[he] fell into the folly of imitating him." "Very slowly, beginning with fair motives: the reorganizing and rehabilitation of Middle-earth, 'neglected by the gods,' he becomes a reincarnation of Evil, and a thing lusting for Complete Power"
- Morgoth's Ring

OK Sauron lusts for power, I think this is his main goal.

it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall ...) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction." Thus "it was the apparent will and power of Melkor to effect his designs quickly and masterfully that had first attracted Sauron to him."
- Morgoth's Ring

OK originally Sauron been Mairon was learning from Aule, I never said he initially was bad, but those qualities coordination, confusion and wasteful friction became twsited under his servitude of Morgoth, Just like Saruman he used that knowledge to wage war defeating it as his virtue.

"He [Sauron] had gone the way of all tyrants: beginning well, at least on the level that while desiring to order all things according to his own wisdom he still at first considered the (economic) well-being of other inhabitants of the Earth. But he went further than human tyrants in pride and the lust for domination, being in origin an immortal (angelic) spirit."
—J.R.R. Tolkien, Letter 183

OK, tolkien compares Sauron with a tyrant but to make a point, tyrants usually strive for the economic well beign of their inhabitants, that doesn't mean tolkien is saying Sauron wanted that in fact he clearly states the opposite:

Sauron was become now a sorcerer of dreadful power, master of shadows and of phantoms, foul in wisdom, cruel in strength, misshaping what he touched, twisting what he ruled, lord of werewolves; his dominion was torment.
—J.R.R. Tolkien

I highlight: His dominion is torment, Sauron is not a Tyrant he is a Dark Lord, the analogy Tolkien makes is to state Sauron lusted for domination same way a tyrant does "thinking he is right in his ways".

“Sauron had never reached this stage of nihilistic madness [as Morgoth had]. He did not object to the existence of the world, so long as he could do what he liked with it. He still had the relics of positive purposes, that descended from the good of the nature in which he began: it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall, and of his relapse) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction."
—J.R.R. Tolkien, The History of Middle-earth X: Morgoth’s Ring

Both of you gave same quote but with variation meaning that one of the quotes is changed or someone of you added something to the quote, I already covered this quote above.

Now in some of your posts you claimed Sauron just wanted power, in others you claimed he wanted to kill and/or humiliate the children of Illuvatar.
Humiliating I can somewhat understand, since he had grown to hate some of the Free Peoples, like Elves and Dwarves for their past quarrels with him. A revenge of sorts.
However, gaining power or killing them would be meaningless. It wouldn't do him any good. Power in itself is a useless thing, you need something to do with that power. You could have all the power in the world, but it's useless if there's nothing around to use it for or to use it on.
For instance, if you had enough power to, say, control other people's minds, but you're left stranded on a post-apocaliptic earth with no life left, what good is that power to you?
Power is never the goal for such villains, it is control. Power alone is meaningless if you can't exert it in some way; the ability to exert that power to control aspects of the world around you, now that is really interesting.

In Sauron's case, killing the children of Illuvatar would be disastrous for him. He can no longer travel to the Undying Lands, let alone face the Valar even if he could, so the only thing he had left was Middle-earth. If he killed the inhabitants, he'd have nothing left to do except being bored until the end of time. Maybe torture some ants with a magnifying glass.
But ruling them, now that is something he could do. And that is exactly what he used his power for, as even you should be able to see throughout the history of Middle-earth. He ruled those he could easily persuade or dominate, such as Orcs/Trolls that were originally Melkor's, and Men in the East and South which were easily swayed due to still living under the shadow left by Melkor.
Elves, Dwarves and the other Men he tried to rule over with wars first, then later with his ingenious plan of the Rings. Which only half-worked since Elves quickly cast them off and Dwarves seemed immune to be bent to his will via the Rings. But the Men he managed to control. So to complete his conquest of Middle-earth, he simply started warring again to conquer what was left by force, and those who did not surrender after seeing their realms fall, he would simply eliminate so that all that was left would be an obeying people.
So in short, killing them is not the answer as to why he did his evil deeds either.

He wanted to rule them to steer them in what was, in his own mind, the right direction for Middle-earth. After all, if all the sentient inhabitants of Middle-earth were guided in the same direction (by force if needed), everything would be a lot smoother and there'd be less chaos, and the world could advance.

OK, from the same source you gave says Sauron lusted for power, domination. You say its more control. correct?
Well nope, he no longer had those starting virtues his knwledge became foul, twisted, and he wanted to dominate to literally finish Melkor's job "humiliate" the Children of Iluviatar, destroy those that he couldn't control obviously, torture others, make pits full of free people...

But why you asked wanted domination, control?
Its very simple, besides Maia and the Valar the free people had "free will" and "the spark of life" so he wanted to dominate it, for the sake of power over Eru and his creation, that is my reasoning.

OK originally Sauron been Mairon was learning from Aule, I never said he initially was bad, but those qualities coordination, confusion and wasteful friction became twsited under his servitude of Morgoth, Just like Saruman he used that knowledge to wage war defeating it as his virtue.

Denethor, Theoden, Aragon, Thranduil, Dain, Gandalf any many more also wages wars or at least played a part in the stragtegising or execution of one. Waging a war is completely separate from motive. Waging a war does not make you evil.

Originally Posted by Al.

OK, tolkien compares Sauron with a tyrant but to make a point

A point that you are missing, perhaps on purpose.

Originally Posted by Al.

tyrants usually strive for the economic well beign of their inhabitants, that doesn't mean tolkien is saying Sauron wanted that in fact he clearly states the opposite:
Sauron was become now a sorcerer of dreadful power, master of shadows and of phantoms, foul in wisdom, cruel in strength, misshaping what he touched, twisting what he ruled, lord of werewolves; his dominion was torment.
—J.R.R. Tolkien

I highlight: His dominion is torment, Sauron is not a Tyrant he is a Dark Lord, the analogy Tolkien makes is to state Sauron lusted for domination same way a tyrant does "thinking he is right in his ways".

Once again that quote is largely irrelevant to this discussion. It "clearly states" nothing of the sort. Tyrant/Dark Lord are meaningless terms. Sauron thinks he is right in his ways, of course, we've established this some time ago. Gandalf influences many people and brings them under his will and into his line of thought. As far as Gandalf's enemies are concerned he might as well be a dark sorcerer of great power. Master of speech and light, foul in wisdom, cruel in strength... He was almost as good at it as Sauron.

Originally Posted by Al.

Both of you gave same quote but with variation meaning that one of the quotes is changed or someone of you added something to the quote, I already covered this quote above.

We've both posted sections of this quote, with additional relevant quotes attached. All quotes from Tolkien, but using your quote...

“Sauron had never reached this stage of nihilistic madness [as Morgoth had]. He did not object to the existence of the world, so long as he could do what he liked with it.He still had the relics of positive purposes, that descended from the good of the nature in which he began: it had been his virtue (and therefore also the cause of his fall, and of his relapse) that he loved order and coordination, and disliked all confusion and wasteful friction."

Even that highlights that Sauron was working towards his intentions of order and efficiency.

Even your own posts are disproving what you're saying now.

If you can find me some solid quotes from Tolkien which actually state that Sauron was pure evil and his only intent was to destroy, dominate and humiliate the free peoples, fair enough, but as it stands you continue to argue against what the author himself has said.

[CENTER][I][FONT=georgia]"Never laugh at live dragons"[/FONT][/I]
[/CENTER]

You know.. I cry when I see the flies stuck to the front of my car (and I really do, not joking with this). But still, when I wish to get from A to B, I will use that car, and sometimes not even as a 'must' but for pleasure. I am also vegetarian, but not vegan as I love milk too much. I sacrificed my enjoyment of meat (for I do like the taste of it), but I have not been able to bring myself to also sacrifice my enjoyment of milk, despite knowing what suffering this brings to calves.

I look at my existence as a trade off. Sometimes I will do things I clearly will judge as 'evil' (in my moral understanding definitely) because an unfulfilled need or want of mine shows me this as the only path I have available, unless I chose to abstain. I could spend my life walking in small steps while gently brushing the floor before me. Use the term 'Ahiṃsā in Jainism' and find it on wiki, if time allows (as again.. we tend to allocate time by using what interests/pleasures us, if by chance possible) to understand what I am referring to with this - but either way - I am not willing to slow my existence down in such extreme measures, as I simply do not want to, not even for a brief amount of time.

Now using what I typed above as a crude basis, Sauron too could just be 'trading off'. We call his actions evil (which in my view they clearly are), but most of us (unless we do brush the floor in front of us and such things) will commit deeds to further our own interests/benefits. In most of our own cases our motives are not even to 'better the world', but only to better our own little existence (and I am very much including myself). This can be excused by the fact that the very set-up of this planet is founded on opportunism, but as sentient beings, can we really excuse our still selfish and opportunistic ways? And before we point the finger at the 'evil' of others, should we not first look whether in truth we share a lot more with those we point at, than what in truth seperates us from them?

Maybe Sauron tried to get from A to B, and the flies (beings of Middle Earth) that ended stuck to the front of his car were considered an unfortunate but necessary trade off. Most humans will just wash their car after a ride, few will even spend a thought on those creatures who lost their lifes in the process (other than seeing them as a nuissance for dirtying the car...)
Yes, I can already hear the argument 'flies do not have feelings though', but okay.. whoever would say such things then also would have to agree with Rene Descartes, correct? (maybe also research him, to read up about how him and his followers nailed animals on boards and cut them open while they were alive, all justified through philosophical argumentation).

The line we draw about 'evil' seems to have more to do with what suits us and what does not. As a vegetarian I consider the meat industry and all those supporting it as partaking in 'evil', while many who love meat and are not willing to sacrifice their taste for it, will find reasons why they do not share my view on this. Travel back in time and you will find slavery was very much excused by those who benefitted from it, and still today many of us will pass products on shelves, certified to not contain child slavery, in favour of cheaper products, as our own pocket means more to us than some suffering a continent far away (or simply because we crave some chocolate and the shop doesn't have certified products) ...

'His [Sauron's] dominion was torment' - plenty of tormenting dominion the human race has to show as well, but it too will find ways to justify their actions, from the individual to nations to the species as a whole, but the line of 'evil' gets pushed about according to one's own interest/benefit, which to me is just what Sauron did as well.. though he may even had a reason a tad bit better than those of us picking up a chocolate bar, conveniently ignoring the victims of the cocoa production (and this is just one example of many).

But even if he didn't have a 'good' motive, one could argue he just did what we all do, only maybe in a bigger scale, but that of course also depends on one's view on the rights of flies...